B'S'D'
To:
From:
INTERNET PARSHA SHEET
ON LECH LICHA - 5762
To receive this parsha sheet in Word and/or Text format, send a blank e-mail to or go to Please also copy me at For archives of old parsha sheets see For Torah links see groups.yahoo.com/group/parsha/links
______
From: Kol Torah <> Subject: Parshat Lech Lecha
KOL TORAH A Student Publication of the Isaac and Mara Benmergui Torah Academy of Bergen County Parshat Lech Lecha 10 Cheshvan 5762 October 27, 2001
This week's issue has been sponsored by Naava and Jeffrey Parker, of Englewood, NJ, in honor of their daughter Sabrina's Bat Mitzva.
Minhagim of Brit Milah
by RABBI HOWARD JACHTER
The many Minhagim involved in fulfilling the commandment of Brit Milah greatly enrich and enhance our observance of this vital Mitzva. In fact, many Rishonim (see the sources cited by Professor Daniel Sperber, Minhagei Yisrael 1:235237) use the phrase "Minhagan Shel Yisrael Torah He," the customs of the Jewish People constitute Torah. Rav Hershel Schachter quotes
Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik as explaining this phrase as an obligation not only to abide by Minhagim, but also an obligation to study Minhagim. Minhagim, Rav Soloveitchik said, are Torah even to the extent that we must study them in order to understand them and discover the basis for them in the Gemara and Rishonim. Indeed, Rav Schachter recounts that the Rav devoted much time in his Shiurim at Yeshiva University to explaining the basis of many Minhagim. In this essay, we seek to explain the source and reason for some Minhagim of Brit Milah. We will discuss the chair set aside for Eliyahu Hanavi, the institution of the Sandek, the question of whether Tefillin should be worn during a Brit, the recitation of Aleinu after a Brit, and the Seudat Brit Milah.
Eliyahu Hanavi's Chair
The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh Deah 265:11) records the celebrated custom to designate a chair for Eliyahu Hanavi at a Brit. The Vilna Gaon (Biur Hagra Y.D. 265:43) writes that the source for this practice is the Pirkei Derebbe Eliezer chapter 29. This Midrash relates that the Jewish People faithfully kept the Mitzva of Brit Milah until the Kingdom of Israel split into two halves. The wicked leaders of the Northern Kingdom, Achav and Ezevel, forbade their subjects to practice Brit Milah. Eliyahu Hanavi, in response, announced that it would not rain until Achav and Ezevel rescinded the antiMilah decree. Ezevel ordered Eliyahu killed for this, and Eliyahu was forced to flee. Hashem appeared to Eliyahu and told Eliyahu that He will reward him for his zealotry in this situation and in killing Zimri Ben Saluh
(Bemidbar chapter 25 recall that Chazal identify Pinchas with Eliyahu Hanavi). Eliyahu's reward will be having a seat of honor designated for him at every Brit Milah. This Midrash conveys a very powerful message. We repeat at the Brit a Pasuk from Yechezkel (16:6) "In your blood live," which emphasizes the vital importance of dedication and sacrifice for Torah. We cannot survive, much less thrive, without our willingness to expend maximal effort in our observance of the Torah. We must even be willing to risk or even give up our lives for Torah. Eliyahu Hanavi serves as a powerful role model of unswerving devotion to Hashem and His Torah and willingness to risk one's life for Torah and the Jewish People. The famous Mohel, Rabbi Harry Bronstein zt"l is a modern day example of Eliyahu Hanavi. Rabbi Bronstein traveled to the Soviet Union on his American passport and clandestinely performed tens of thousands of Brit Milo until the KGB caught him and placed him in a Soviet prison. The Soviets released him after he suffered a serious heart attack and President Carter pressured Premier Brezhnev for Rabbi Bronstein's release. Due to Rabbi Bronstein's heroic efforts, tens of thousands of Jews established a connection to Judaism that they otherwise could not have done. It is important to emphasize that the Gemara (Shabbat 130a) notes that Jews have traditionally risked their lives in the face of government decrees forbidding Milah.
The Sandek
The Rama (Y.D. 265:11) records the practice of the Sandek holding the baby on his thighs. The Biur Hagra (Y.D. 265:44) cites the Midrash Shochar Tov that explains that this is based on the Pasuk (Tehillim 35:10) that states "All of my limbs shall say 'Hashem who is like you.'" The Midrash outlines how every body part is used in the service of Hashem. Our thighs participate in the service of Hashem, explains the Midrash, by placing the baby on our thighs during the Brit. The Rama records a custom that a father should not honor the same individual twice with being the Sandek for his children. The reason is that the Sandek is compared to a Kohen offering the Ketoret (incense offering) in the Bait Hamikdash. The procedure regarding the Ketoret is that a Kohen does not perform this Mitzva more than once in his lifetime. Hashem rewards the Kohen who offers the Ketoret with wealth. Thus, we want to afford the opportunity to as many Kohanim as possible to become wealthy (Yoma 26a). Similarly, we wish to afford as many people as possible to serve as a Sandek and receive Hashem's blessing to become wealthy. The Gra (Y.D. 265:45) expresses some skepticism regarding this Minhag. First, based on its reasoning, the Minhag should have been that one should not serve more than once as a Sandek for any child, not just two different children of one family. Second, the Gra writes that we have never seen someone become wealthy because he served as a Sandek. Nevertheless, the Aruch Hashulchan (Y.D. 265:34) concludes, we should abide by the custom recorded by the Rama. The Aruch Hashulchan notes, though, that the custom in many locales is that the Rav of the city serves as the Sandek for all the baby boys. The Aruch Hashulchan justifies this practice by comparing the local Rav to the Kohen Gadol, who had the right to offer a Korban or Ketoret any time he desired (see Yoma 14a). Indeed, it is related that the Chazon Ish served as the Sandek for innumerable baby boys. Rabbi Yissachar Frand relates that Rav Yaakov Yitzchak Ruderman (the Rosh Yeshiva of Yeshivat Ner Yisrael) also served as the Sandek for countless baby boys.
Tefillin and Brit Milah
The Shach (Y.D.265:24) and Magen Avraham (25:28) record the Minhag that men do not remove their Tefillin until after the Milah. The reason, the Shach explains, is that the Torah describes both Tefillin and Brit Milah as an "Ot," a sign. However, Rav Moshe Pirutinsky in his Sefer Habrit (265:133) cites a number of Acharonim who object to this practice. They argue that the Tefillin are a "competing" Ot to Milah and thus wearing Tefillin during a Brit denigrates the Ot of Brit Milah. Moreover, these authorities note that the Gemara (Zevachim 19a) states that Kohanim do not wear Tefillin during the Avoda. This is a relevant point because Chazal compare a Brit Milah to a Korban (see, for example, the Biur Hagra Y.D. 265:40). Indeed, Rav Yitzchak Yosef (Yalkut Yosef p.895) rules that it is preferable not to wear Tefillin during the Brit. Moreover, the Aruch Hashulchan (Y.D. 265:38) notes that the Minhag has emerged that men remove Tefillin before the Brit. The Minhag today is that men remove their Tefillin before the Brit, except for the father of the baby and the Sandek. However, the Mishna Berura (25:55) writes that it is "proper" not to remove the Tefillin until after the Brit Milah. Indeed, I once met Rav Reuven Feinstein (the son of Rav Moshe Feinstein) at a Brit and I noticed that he did not remove his Tefillin until after the Brit. He told me that this is proper practice for all to follow. Rabbi Moshe Snow reports that Rav Dovid Feinstein does not remove his Tefillin until after the Brit.
Aleinu after the Brit
The Shach (ibid.) also mentions the Minhag to recite Aleinu after the Brit and all of its accompanying Berachot and Tefilot. The Pri Megadim explains that Aleinu emphasizes our separation from the rest of the world and the Brit celebrates the unique relationship between Hashem and the Jewish People. Another reason might be that in Aleinu we note our mission "to perfect the world through Hashem's kingdom." Similarly, the Brit signifies the need for us to improve ourselves as noted by the Sefer Hachinuch (Mitzva 2). The Sefer Hachinuch notes that males are not born with perfect bodies because Hashem wants man to perfect his body. Similarly, the Sefer Hachinuch writes, the Brit Milah should inspire us to perfect our souls and spiritual life. The Aleinu prayer underscores this theme.
The Seudat Brit Milah
The Rama (Y.D. 265:12) notes that one who does not participate in the Seudat Brit Milah is excommunicated from Hashem. This comment is based on Gemara Pesachim 113b and Tosafot Pesachim 114a s.v. Veein. Tosafot explains that the Midrash states that one who eats at a Seudat Brit Milah is spared from Gehenom. In fact, the Pitchei Teshuva Y.D. 265:18 and Aruch Hashulchan 265:37 note that we do not invite people to a Brit due to concern that the people will be excommunicated from Hashem if they do not attend. Rather, we merely inform people of the Brit's time and location. We might suggest another reason for the seriousness of this matter. We mentioned that Chazal compare a Brit to a Korban. Accordingly, we may compare eating at a Seudat Brit Milah to eating a Korban. Sharing a meal is a bonding experience. When we eat a Korban we celebrate our relationship with Hashem (see Rabbi Josh Berman's "The Temple," which develops this point at length). Similarly, when we participate in a Seudat Brit Milah we celebrate the covenant between Hashem and the Jewish People. This also may be the reason why Chassidim insist on serving meat at a Seudat Brit Milah, even though meat is not especially appetizing early in the morning. Since Korbanot were meat, the Seudat Brit Milah should consist of meat. Indeed, attendance at a Brit Milah and its subsequent Seudah is of great significance. A ruling issued by Rav Hershel Schachter emphasizes this point. A group of Rabbeim wished to attend a Brit Milah of a child of their friend. However, the Brit was scheduled to take place at a somewhat distant location and the Rabbeim would have to miss teaching some of their Torah classes if they would attend the Brit. The Rabbeim asked Rav Schachter if attending the Brit enjoys preference over teaching the Shiur. Rav Schachter ruled that the Rabbeim should attend the Brit. Rav Schachter explained that the Rabbeim would be setting an example for their Talmidim to attend the Brit of their friends' children in the future.
Conclusion
Many more Minhagim are associated with Brit Milah that we have not discussed. An excellent resource for investigating the reasons and applications of the many Minhagim is Rav Pirutinsky's Sefer Habrit. I hope that this essay serves as an inspiration to follow Rav Soloveitchik's exhortation to explore in depth the customs of the Jewish People.
Staff
EditorsinChief: Josh Dubin, David Gertler Managing Editors: Yair Manas, Uriel Schechter Publishing Manager: Zev Feigenbaum Publication Editor: Ilan Tokayer Business Manager: Yehuda Goldin Staff: Noam Block, Ami Friedman, Shuky Gross, Simcha Haber, Oren Levy, Ari Michael, Effie Richmond, Dani Shaffren, Sam Wiseman Webmaster: Yisroel Ellman Faculty Advisor: Rabbi Howard Jachter email: CHECK OUT OUR NEW WEBPAGE!
______
From THE PRACTICAL TORAH A Collection of Presentations of Halachah Based on the Parshas Hashavua
BY RABBI MICHAEL TAUBES
Parshas Lech Lecha: Changing One's Name
No definitive Halacha LeMa'aseh conclusions should be applied to practical situations based on any of these Shiurim.
Towards the end of this Parsha, we are told that Hashem changed Avram's name to Avraham (Bereishis 17:5) and then changed Sorai's name to Soroh (Ibid. Posuk 15). Based upon the juxtaposition of his latter Posuk describing Sorai's name change to the Posuk stating that she will eventually have a child (Ibid. Posuk 16), the Gemara in Rosh HaShanah (16b) derives that changing a person's name is one of the things which can alter a bad decree which may have been passed against that person. Interestingly, the Midrash in Bereishis Rabbah (Parsha 44 Siman 15) derives this fact that changing one's name can nullify a bad decree from the earlier Posuk, describing Avram's name change to Avraham. The Midrash in Koheles Rabbasi (Parsha 5 Siman 4), while stating likewise that the value of Shinui HaShemchanging one's nameis learned from the Posuk relating to Avraham Avinu, mentions Sorai as well, concluding that a decree had been made that Avram and Sorai would never have child; Avraham and Soroh, however, would indeed have a child.
In explaining the reason why changing one's name can cancel a bad decree, the Maharsha on the above cited Gemara in Rosh HaShanah (Chidushai Aggados to Rosh HaShanah Ibid. s.v. Arba Devarim) quotes from the Semag (Mitzvos Aseh 17) that when one changes one's name, one declares that he is, in effect, a different person, and not the same person who committed the deeds which generated the unfavorable decree. The Eitz Yosef, in his commentary to the above cited Midrash in Bereishis Rabbah (Ibid. s.v. Af), explains it similarly, saying that person declares that he is now, with his new name, not the same person he was, and, consequently, not the person against whom this bad decree has been passed. The Maharsha (Ibid.) then adds that after one has changed one's name, one should recognize that in actuality, it was not his original name, but his sins that caused Hashem to decree unfavorable things for him, and he should therefore become inspired to do Teshuvah and change his ways, and in that way become a truly different person. The Ran in Rosh HaShanah (3b in Rif s.v. Shinui HaShem) also stresses that changing one's name can annul a bad decree because this act will inspire the person to do Teshuvah. The Rambam thus rules (Hilchos Teshuvah Perek 2 Halacha 4) that part of the process of doing Teshuvah is to change one's name, meaning, to declare that he is now a different person, not the one who committed so many sins See Perek 7 Ibid. Halachos 6, 7).
In the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh Deah Siman 335 Sif 10), the Ramo, based on this idea that Shinui Hashem can cancel an unfavorable decree, writes that there is a practice to give a new name to a sick person when blessing him and davening on his behalf. The Aruch HaShulchan (ibid. Sif 12) writes that this means that he is given a new name in addition to, not as a replacement for, the name he already has. This is the case despite that fact that the Gemara in Berachos (13a) indicates regarding Avraham Avinu that it is improper to refer to him by his original name at all. He then states (Ibid.) that this name change is done when the illness is very severe, although he offers no guidelines as to how to determine that status. The Gesher HaChaim (Chelek 1, Perek 1, Sif 3, Ot 4) likewise writes that many observe this custom to change the name of a dangerously ill person by adding on a new name, and he then adds that the changing of the name is accompanied by the recitation of Tehillim in the presence of a Minyan and various other special Tefillos, including a special Yehi Ratzon recited specifically when giving someone an additional name, as printed in many Siddurim. As a side point, it is interesting to note that this idea in general of reciting Tehillim in order to be protected from anguish and harm is codified by the Rambam (Hilchos Avodas Kochavim Perek 11 Halacha 12).
As to precisely how to choose the new name to be added, Rabbeinu Yehudah HaChassid implies in the Sefer Chassidim (Siman 244) that it is done by means of a Goral, a kind of lottery, meaning that a Chumash (or a Tanach) is opened up, and the first name that one comes across is the new name given to the sick person. It is noteworthy that the Birkei Yosef, in his commentary to the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh Deah Siman 179 Sif Katan 8), quotes those who say that one can seek "advice" in general by opening up a Chumash or a Tanach and studying the Pesukim which one comes across. The Sefer Ta'amei HaMinhagim (Kuntras Acharon to Siman 217, Inyanei Berachos Ot 7, Amud 105) quotes, however, that if the first name one sees is that of a wicked person, one may not give that name to the sick person, since the Gemara in Yoma (Ibid. 38b, and see Ibid. Tosafos s.v. D'Lo) indicates that one should not use the name of a wicked person. He then quotes from the Chida ( Sefer Dvash, Maareches 300 Ot 4) that there are certain other names which should not be used for this purpose, and certain names which should be used. The common practice today is to give the sick person a name which somehow symbolizes life, health, strength, or some other type of Beracha which expresses the hope that the person will recover from his illness.